RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

writing for godot

The Mistake that could have Progressives Tripping Up Democrats, Identity Politics and Economics

Print
Thursday, 27 July 2017 12:50

The internal debate on whether identity politics should be watered down by Democratic candidates is a false choice. With Senator Schumer's release of his "Better Deal" plan, and new attacks on rights, this debate is going to get hotter.

Amanda Marcotte at Salon just wrote a piece criticizing the approach of pushing an economic plan. It's a good launching point for describing what's off-point in this criticism.

Two clarifications. One, the Better Deal plan is in the right direction, but so far is weak, off aim, and had a pathetic (a word carefully chosen) PR launch. I've written numerous pieces on ReaderSupportedNews about what the Democrats should do, specifically on economics, and on PR.

Two, we of the left have a bad habit of framing anyone we disagree with as utterly wrong, horrible, and to be cast beyond the outer wall. Real debate is about refining our thinking as we go. That's what this is.

Marcotte's main critique is that Democrats should not chase white, rural, Trump voters because they are bigoted and won't respond to any message from Democrats. True, any voter who is more interested in white supremacy, or a general fear that the culture around them might change, even more than they care about their own pocket book, is not worth chasing. The Inferno had no special place for them, but being trapped in their own minds must be a hell in itself.

Marcotte is not against an economic message, but what she says would lead Democrats to three mistakes: painting a whole group and region with the same negative brush, something that's contrary to the values of the left; abandoning some votes even if from people we disagree with; and conflating an economic message with abandoning the identity message.

A key point here is that Hillary won. Adding even a small portion of the Trump voters, or the discouraged non-voters, by pushing an economic message in parallel with the identity message, means Democrats gaining that much more in 2018.

We know that there were many who voted for Obama, but then voted for Trump. (About 4-6 million, net (Rasmusen), and "accounted for more than two-thirds of the reason Clinton lost" (McClatchy)). These are voters who went against Democrats for reasons other than racism or party loyalty. They are votes that can be won back.

To write-off all of middle America, or all of rural America, or all rural whites, as Marcotte does, is contrary to liberal principles. We wouldn't condone doing that with any other race or region. Certainly plenty have to be written-off, like those who would never vote for a candidate who supports gay rights, but accusing all rural, white Americans of that is wrong. Just wrong.

Identity politics, the rights of minorities and gays and women, and all of the other social justice issues, are at the core of left ideals and need to be pushed even stronger in the face of ugly backlash, but there is no more a need to choose between social justice and economics than there is to choose between supporting gays or minorities. It was Barack who said we should walk and chew gum at the same time. It was Dr. King who made such a point of economic justice being a key part of social justice. Even voters who focus on social justice issues will be glad for any economic improvements.

The problem is that Democratic leadership has been derelict on economic issues. Yes, they pushed the Dodd-Frank changes years ago. Yes, a few rabble-rousers, Bernie and Elizabeth Warren, push the issue. Yes Hillary had some modest proposals. But do you have a clear impression that if Democrats were back in the majority they would rush through a host of big economic changes on behalf of people? And not just sit on the status quo? No, neither do I. Schumer is trying to change that but people are sure to be skeptical, and rightly so.

There is no reason not to both correct that, and push social justice. I suspect that candidates who push both would win the most votes. Some won't vote for them out of rejection of the social justice issues. Fine. Let them go.

Some will vote for them even though they disagree on social justice issues. This is an important point for Democrats, both leaders and voters. That's okay. If some think the Democrats have the winning economic plan, and vote-in candidates who push both that and social justice, even though some of those voters are prejudiced and against the social justice part, that gets our candidates into office, who can then make advances in both economics and social justice. That's political reality. It's how progress is won.

Pushing an economic plan does not need to mean pushing social justice issues less. Rather, it completes the missing piece of the progressive agenda.

I can not speak to the intentions of Democratic leaders. I can speak to what is needed. That is, for the social justice message to continue and even grow, while adding the desperately needed economic message.

 

See my core piece, The Plan for the Win

 

Tom Cantlon has the interesting challenge of being a left-leaning writer for the paper in a small, right-leaning Western town, in a right-leaning state. He can be reached at comments at TomCantlon dot com.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
Email This Page

 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN